Page 1 of 2
Ifeanyi Ohalete
Posted: Sat Jun 04, 2005 3:59 pm
by Skinsfan55
Posted: Sat Jun 04, 2005 4:04 pm
by portis26
Why would we trade for him? We just cut him last year. Andre Lott, Ryan Clark, Matt Bowen, and Pierson Prioleau can all step up and fill the void if Taylor misses any extended period of time.
RELAX.
Posted: Sat Jun 04, 2005 4:05 pm
by Skinsfan55
Ohalete is better than all those players IMO.
Posted: Sat Jun 04, 2005 4:09 pm
by BossHog
How about we try and trade skinsfan55 for him. :-"
While it's nice that you like Iffy, I'm pretty sure we won't try and make a trade for a guy who was cast off IN FAVOR of playing the aforementioned players... whether you like them or not.
Posted: Sat Jun 04, 2005 4:09 pm
by portis26
If so, then why did we cut him?
Posted: Sat Jun 04, 2005 4:21 pm
by Smithian
Where did this come from?
Posted: Sat Jun 04, 2005 4:23 pm
by Skinsfan55
BossHog wrote:How about we try and trade skinsfan55 for him. :-"
While it's nice that you like Iffy, I'm pretty sure we won't try and make a trade for a guy who was cast off IN FAVOR of playing the aforementioned players... whether you like them or not.
It was between Bowen and Ohalete... it was a dead heat and really a toss up decision.
He wasn't cast off in favor of playing guys who weren't even with the team yet...
Posted: Sat Jun 04, 2005 4:29 pm
by Smithian
Ok, he was cut off because we had Todd Franz. That makes it worse.
Posted: Sat Jun 04, 2005 4:33 pm
by Punu
I really liked him...
that's all.
Posted: Sat Jun 04, 2005 4:37 pm
by portis26
I kind of liked him too, but if he's not good enough for Gibbs and Williams I don't want him.
Posted: Sat Jun 04, 2005 4:50 pm
by 1niksder
Skinsfan55 wrote:It was between Bowen and Ohalete... it was a dead heat and really a toss up decision.
He wasn't cast off in favor of playing guys who weren't even with the team yet...
Pierson Prioleau was the only guy mentioned that wasn't on thr team. Iffy was beat out for his spot and he played both FS and SS but couldn't stick
Posted: Sat Jun 04, 2005 5:14 pm
by BossHog
Skinsfan55 wrote:It was between Bowen and Ohalete... it was a dead heat and really a toss up decision.
He wasn't cast off in favor of playing guys who weren't even with the team yet...
huh? Complete misrepresentation of actual facts.
Ryan Clark, Todd Franz and Andre Lott were most certainly with the team... obviously prioleau wasn't. Ohalete had been relegated to BEHIND Franz and Bowen. The Redskins picked up Clark about 3 weeks before Ohalete was even cut... before Camp even started... so the brass had all of TC to determine who fit in where. At that time, Ohalete was deemed expendable.
Not to mention the fact that the Redskins cut him after re-signing him that same offseason... which to me means that they had every intention of retaining him... until they watched him at training camp. Iffy and safety coach Steve Jackson didn't agree on some things... any of this ringing a bell yet?
From TWT the day after the cut:
Said assistant head coach for defense Gregg Williams: "He deserves a chance to make a team. He's not going to make our team, but let's make sure he makes somebody else's team."
Precipitating Ohalete's tumble from first string in the offseason to third string in camp was a casual approach to dropping weight and getting faster, one club source said. Several members of the organization felt that once the Redskins drafted Sean Taylor with the fifth pick overall, Ohalete no longer gave full effort.
Publicly, Jackson blamed the split on a poor "fit." Ohalete always has been a gambler, and both he and Jackson alluded to a difference of opinion on technique. In addition, the 68-yard touchdown reception Ohalete yielded Saturday to the Carolina Panthers' Keary Colbert couldn't have helped his case.
"I wasn't playing techniques the way [Jackson] wanted me to. I was at fault for that," Ohalete said. "And ... we just didn't see eye-to-eye. He didn't think I was listening to him on the football field. That's his opinion. I tried to play my best for him, and it just didn't work out."
http://www.washtimes.com/sports/2004081 ... -8713r.htm
Be as confident in your statement as you want, it doesn't make it right. Your recollection of events is just plain inaccurate. You're likely substituting how you felt at the time for what actually happened.
Posted: Sat Jun 04, 2005 8:04 pm
by JPM36
Ohalete took too many chances. We're better off without him. We have plenty of safeties.
Taylor will be our starting FS on opening day, and he will finish the season in Hawaii.
Posted: Sat Jun 04, 2005 8:27 pm
by BigSkinNig
we are stacked at saftey this the dumbest post ever
Posted: Sat Jun 04, 2005 8:29 pm
by teenage dirtbag
I agree, we have a crowd in the defensive backfield, that's why he was cut in the first place.
Posted: Sat Jun 04, 2005 9:14 pm
by nxtseantaylor
i liked him, but if he's been cut oh well
Posted: Sat Jun 04, 2005 10:35 pm
by Redskin in Canada
Are we so desperate that EVERY time someone is cut by another team, somebody in this board jumps at it as if we had the WORST defense in the league?
Not even Chiefs fans sound as desperate as some of you.
Come on guys!
Posted: Sat Jun 04, 2005 10:44 pm
by Redskins4Life
even if we wanted to reacquire ohalete the possibility of the FO doing it is slim to none
Posted: Sun Jun 05, 2005 1:45 am
by 1niksder
Redskin in Canada wrote:Are we so desperate that EVERY time someone is cut by another team, somebody in this board jumps at it as if we had the WORST defense in the league?
Not even Chiefs fans sound as desperate as some of you.
Come on guys!
This is what happens this time of year (post June 1). Add to that a story about one of our starters in hot water, and you get something like this. Most would hold more posibility than seeking a guy who ...
1. Was cut last year
2. Under contract with another team
3. Is in a court battle with our starting RB
4. Plays a position that isn't a major concern for us
5. Not even being considered for released
Posted: Sun Jun 05, 2005 4:28 am
by Punu
we are stacked at saftey this the dumbest post ever
I understand some of you disagree with an opinon but dont go on about how "dumb" the post is.... Someone made it cuz they want a few opinons, that's all... If you dont care for the thread, don't post...
Posted: Sun Jun 05, 2005 9:40 am
by sch1977
Punu wrote:we are stacked at saftey this the dumbest post ever
I understand some of you disagree with an opinon but dont go on about how "dumb" the post is.... Someone made it cuz they want a few opinons, that's all... If you dont care for the thread, don't post...
I agree.
Posted: Sun Jun 05, 2005 10:23 am
by admin
Punu wrote:we are stacked at saftey this the dumbest post ever
I understand some of you disagree with an opinon but dont go on about how "dumb" the post is.... Someone made it cuz they want a few opinons, that's all... If you dont care for the thread, don't post...
So you're free to express your opinion but not to say that a post was dumb?
No offense... but if a mod read it and said or did nothing with it, what makes you think you should? Nobody attacked the poster themself... he didn't say 'You're dumb for making that post'... so I don't see anything wrong here.
I'm not saying it was in good taste and that someone who isn't going to explain WHY it's dumb should be given much thought... but I fail to see how they're less entitled to voice an opinion than the guy who started the thread in the first place.
Thanks for your concern, but please leave it up to the moderators to decide what is and what is not acceptable.
Posted: Sun Jun 05, 2005 11:06 am
by sch1977
I agree with you Boss, but I think the point is that the comment was pointless. IF you think the post is dumb that is fine, but back up your criticisms with something substantial. Merely saying it was dumb proves nothing except that the author just wanted to post something. I just like to see meaninful substantial posts. JMO
Posted: Sun Jun 05, 2005 11:46 am
by 1niksder
sch1977 wrote:I agree with you Boss, but I think the point is that the comment was pointless. IF you think the post is dumb that is fine, but back up your criticisms with something substantial. Merely saying it was dumb proves nothing except that the author just wanted to post something. I just like to see meaninful substantial posts. JMO
OK let's see the post that has this thread headed off topic is the topic of the theard (which means someone only understands what they want to understand). I'll see if I can help.
Someone made a statement that you felt was pointless and the pointless post criticized a previous post.
I reread the thread and this is what I found....
we are stacked at saftey this the dumbest post ever
The funny thing is this statement is NOT pointless, the poster stated his/her opinion (The post was the dmbest ever).
Maybe feels that way becaus he only reads certain forums I dodn't know but I wouldn't say dumbest post EVER, but the poster got is point across.
He also stated a reason for his opinion as to why it was the dumbest post ever by saying "we are stacked at safety.
This poster attacked the post not the poster which is something a lot of members forget is the rule, instead some posters would have stated the poster was this,that, or the other thing(something negative) for making such a post. And that would have been against the rules
BTW: the only reason Iffy returns to DC is on a brief visit to pick up the 20K CP owes him
Posted: Sun Jun 05, 2005 11:55 am
by Punu
okay okay slowly backing away from this thread with my hands up...
outta here.........!!!!!!!!!!
